Lessons from the recently canceled Nestlé event that raises public concerns
Health Science Research By Dr Mike Broadly
A few days ago, I read an article in The BMJ titled “The ultra-processed food industry has no business in sponsoring health and nutrition events.” It made me think and inspired me to write this short story. As a healthcare advocate, I will summarize my understanding and thoughts to give you a valuable perspective on this incident.
In a recent turn of events, the planned “Nourish and flourish: The role of nutrition in improving women’s health outcomes” event, organized by Devex in partnership with Nestlé, was canceled following significant public criticism.
The controversy highlights the ongoing debate over corporate influence in public health policy, especially when it involves companies with a controversial history, like Nestlé.
Nestlé has become somewhat controversial over the years in health and nutrition communities. For example, as documented by The BMJ last year, the European Congress on Obesity has removed Nestlé as a sponsor following widespread condemnation on social media.
As you may know, Nestlé, a global giant in the food industry, has long been criticized for its marketing practices, particularly in relation to infant formula. Critics argue that Nestlé’s involvement in public health initiatives can create conflicts of interest, undermining the credibility of health advice and policy.
For years, Nestlé has used various tactics to influence health policy, including forming partnerships with universities and health organizations. These partnerships often come under scrutiny for promoting the company’s interests over public health needs.
This year’s event, originally scheduled for July 17, 2024, aimed to discuss women’s health outcomes, with Nestlé as a key partner. However, the partnership quickly drew ire from the public, including health professionals and advocacy groups, who questioned the ethics of involving a company with a history of aggressive infant formula marketing tactics.
Social media outcry and open letters pressured Devex to first postpone and eventually cancel the event, along with their broader partnership with Nestlé. This incident is the latest in a series of corporate-public health clashes, where big food corporations attempt to position themselves as allies in health and nutrition discussions.
Devex, an international news organization with ties to the United Nations, justified the partnership by stating that it was an “advertising partnership” and that the event would not address infant nutrition directly. However, critics found this reasoning flawed, arguing that separating women’s health from infant health is problematic, given how closely the two are linked.
The backlash also raised questions about why the UN is not united in its stance against conflicts of interest in public health partnerships. The participation of Jemimah Njuki, a UN Women section head, further fueled the controversy, leading to demands for clearer guidelines on such collaborations.
I wanted to write this piece because this incident has broader implications for the public health sector, particularly in how it engages with the private sector. It highlights the need for stricter due diligence and exclusionary criteria when deciding on partnerships with entities that have a history of harmful practices.
The World Health Organization recently released a tool to help member states navigate such engagements, emphasizing the importance of avoiding partnerships with companies that violate international health codes.
WHO said: “This Decision-making tool offers health authorities, government actors and other relevant organizations a systematic methodology for assessing, analysing and reaching a decision on whether or not to engage with private sector entities to complement or enhance efforts of the public sector in addressing the prevention and control of NCDs.”
The cancellation of the Devex-Nestlé event reminds us of the public’s growing awareness and intolerance of corporate influence in public health. The cancellation of the Devex-Nestlé event serves as a critical example of the ongoing tension between public health priorities and corporate interests.
This is a call to action for health organizations, governments, and the public to remain vigilant and ensure that health policies are guided by public welfare, not corporate profits.
This incident reinforces the importance of transparency and accountability in public health. It also highlights the power of public opinion in holding corporations and organizations accountable.
For those in the health and media industries, it is a reminder to carefully consider the implications of corporate partnerships and to prioritize the well-being of the public above all else.
I also wrote a relevant story before and linked it here in case you might be interested in reading it.
4 Corporate Culprits Behind Major Chronic Diseases According to WHO
World Health Organization blames tobacco, processed food, fossil fuel, and alcohol industry for 2.7 million deaths…medium.com
Thanks for reading. I wish you a joyful and long life. Please feel free to leave a comment sharing your thoughts and experiences on this important health topic.
My stories, of course, never include health or professional advice.
I am a retired healthcare scientist in his mid-70s, and I have several grandkids who keep me going and inspire me to write on this platform. I am also the chief editor of the Health and Science publication on Medium.com. As a giveback activity, I volunteered as an editor for Illumination publications, supporting many new writers. I will be happy to read, publish, and promote your stories. You may connect with me on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Quora, where I share stories I read. You may subscribe to my account to get my stories in your inbox when I post. You can also find my distilled content on Subtack: Health Science Research By Dr Mike Broadly.
Lessons Learned from My Personal Stories
Health Science Research By Dr Mike Broadly. This story was originally published here.
Leave a Reply